Yashpratap Singh Judev v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC2 Feb 2026WPC/437/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh HC, WPC No. 437 of 2026, order dt. 03/02/2026, Rakesh Mohan Pandey J; mandamus directing State Transport Authority/RTA to decide pending Permanent Stage Carriage Permit application dt. 22.11.2025 (Kunkuri-Ranchi route, Bus CG-14-MP-1111) within 45 days; petition disposed of; Motor Vehicles Rule 1994 referenced; no monetary award; useful as an example of a time-bound direction on a pending transport permit application.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to the respondent to decide the petitioner's pending application for grant of 'Permanent Stage Carriage' preferably within 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. ¶¶24

Yashpratap Singh Judev Vs the State of Chhattisgarh — Motor Accident Claims | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPC No. 437 of 2026

¶6

Yashpratap Singh Judev S/o Shri Ranvijay Singh Judev Aged About 26 Years R/o House No. 01, Palace Road, Aaram Niwas, Tehsil- Jashpur, Distt.- Jashpur (C.G.). ... Petitioner

¶7

versus

¶8

The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, State Transport Authority, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶9

... Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Abhishek Gupta, Panel Lawyer

¶11

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶12

Order on Board

¶13

03/02/2026

¶14

The petitioner has filed the present petition seeking the following

¶15

relief:-

¶16

“10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the records pertaining to case of petitioner.

¶17

10.2. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to consider and decide the application of petitioner for grant of Permanent Stage Carriage Permit, in accordance with provisions of Motor Vehicles Rule 1994.

¶18

10.3. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in favour of petitioner, may also be granted. ”

¶19

¶20

Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that an application for grant of a ‘Permanent Stage Carriage’ on the route from Kunkuri to Ranchi via Jashpur, Manjhatoli, Gumla, Sisai and one trip back for the vehicle Bus bearing registration No.CG-14-MP-1111 is pending consideration before the Regional Transport Authority. He would further submit that a direction may be issued to the respondent authorities to decide the pending application dated 22.11.2025, expeditiously.

¶21

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State would oppose the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶22

Heard.

¶23

Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by Mr. Mishra, at this juncture, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent to decide the pending application of the petitioner for grant of ‘Permanent Stage Carriage’ preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶24

With the aforesaid observation(s) and direction(s), the present writ petition stands disposed of .

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

Nadim

Yashpratap Singh Judev v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yashpratap Singh Judev v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Reliance General Insurance Company Limited Vs Smt. Uttara Sahu (Banpela)

Shri Ashok Kumar Yadav Prop. Vs Dcit

Manish Travels Vs State Transport Authority

Kripa Ram Patel Vs Naib Tahsildar

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs Narayan Das Vaishanv

Smt. Triloka Vs Keshav Kumar Sahu